Landscape or Portrait? The Impact of Page Orientation on the Understandability of Scientific Posters

The recent developments in the eye tracking technology lead to new insights in how humans read, yet little is known about how the layout affects the comprehension. In this study, the differences in the understandability and the reading behaviour of two different page orientations (portrait and landscape) of a scientific poster are investigated. An eye tracking experiment was designed to find out whether the participants focus more on different areas in different orientations and whether the orientation has any effect on the reading behaviour or the overall comprehension of the poster. The participants' gazes were recorded and mapped onto the document using homographies. The saccade and transitional analysis over 30 participants concludes that the portrait orientation is better for remembering specific details while the landscape orientation supplements a high level understanding.

[1]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Analysis of text layout quality using wearable eye trackers , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia & Expo Workshops (ICMEW).

[2]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  What Makes a Beautiful Landscape Beautiful: Adjective Noun Pairs Attention by Eye-Tracking and Gaze Analysis , 2015, ASM@ACM Multimedia.

[3]  Gary R. Bradski,et al.  ORB: An efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision.

[4]  G LoweDavid,et al.  Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints , 2004 .

[5]  Gary J. Anglin,et al.  On Empirically Validating Functions of Pictures in Prose , 1987 .

[6]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Text 2.0 , 2010, CHI EA '10.

[7]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  A robust realtime reading-skimming classifier , 2012, ETRA.

[8]  Joaquim Salvi,et al.  The SLAM problem: a survey , 2008, CCIA.

[9]  Rachael E. Jack,et al.  Culture Shapes How We Look at Faces , 2008, PloS one.

[10]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Eye movements as implicit relevance feedback , 2008, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[11]  David Beymer,et al.  Wide vs. Narrow Paragraphs: An Eye Tracking Analysis , 2005, INTERACT.

[12]  E. Gordon,et al.  Defining the temporal threshold for ocular fixation in free-viewing visuocognitive tasks , 2003, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[13]  Alan Kennedy,et al.  Book Review: Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures , 2016, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  Entropy based transition analysis of eye movement on physics representational competence , 2016, UbiComp Adjunct.

[15]  Andreas Dengel,et al.  A study on representational competence in physics using mobile eye tracking systems , 2016, MobileHCI Adjunct.

[16]  R. Caldara,et al.  Investigating cultural diversity for extrafoveal information use in visual scenes. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[17]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  Speeded-Up Robust Features (SURF) , 2008, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[18]  Juan D. Tardós,et al.  ORB-SLAM2: An Open-Source SLAM System for Monocular, Stereo, and RGB-D Cameras , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.